On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 11:45:58PM +0200, Max Schwarz wrote: > Hi Peter, > > > you could make the support compiled in, but not compiled _out_. so even if > > you HAVE_SMOOTH_SCROLLING, the old bits are ready to go when enabled. > > if no smooth scrolling axis is otherwise present on the device, just post > > button events as previously. > Well, the proper thing to do would be to add new valuators and report the > changed axes via a XIDeviceChangedEvent. But since there's no infrastructure > for that yet (or is it?), I'll do it that way.
correct, we don't have that infrastructure yet. one day... > > > #define TestBit(bit, array) ((array[(bit) / LONG_BITS]) & (1L << > > > ((bit) %> > > > LONG_BITS))) > > > +#define evdev_SetBit(bit, array) ((array[(bit) / LONG_BITS]) |= (1L << > > > ((bit) > > Can we use the server's BitIsOn (inputstr.h), SetBit, etc here instead of > > relying on our own macros with name conflicts? > That wouldn't be the same on Big-Endian machines, since BitIsOn() from > inputstr.h expects an char array, while the evdev bitmasks are kept in longs. > I agree that this bit looks bad, maybe we could rename TestBit to > evdev_TestBit to match evdev_SetBit? evdev_set_bit, evdev_bit_isset then please. preferably inline functions to get some type safety and extra compiler warnings. Cheers, Peter _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
